End of Software Support - Clarifications

But for further clarification, they will stop working as they do now as soon as your streaming service releases an incompatible API

I hope they will do it after May, then retire other products over to legacy as and when.

This is seeing how much of a sh1te storm they get, and how much new stuff they can shift at 30% off and kill off large % of legacy stuff first.

There’s an awful lot of angst and despair in this thread (and in its predecessor). Might I suggest a wee bit of perspective is in order?

I say that as someone who 16 Sonos units in one house (the vast majority of which will be legacy) and 7 in another house (none of which are legacy - yet). I am looking at an outlay in excess of £5,000 to replace all of my legacy units with modern ones, should I choose to go down that route.

A few thoughts, which are nothing more than my personal views:

1. Anyone who thinks that a competitor product is not going to run into this problem sooner or later is deluding themselves. Sonos hit it first because they have lead the market. The competitors will be avidly noting how to handle the PR side of this issue when they have to confront it.
2. I have zero intention of letting this announcement disrupt my pre-planned upgrades (I have had my eye on replacing three of my units, only one of which comes close to being driven by necessity). If and when a legacy unit fails to be capable of delivering a streamed music service or internet radio, that’s the moment to look at replacing it. Not before.
3. If - and it is a big if - the issue with older units is their memory and storage capacity, then I wonder how long it will be before a clever third party invents a little box that plugs into a legacy unit, intercepts the data sent to it, and buffers it for the legacy unit so that the legacy unit’s memory and storage is not overwhelmed.
4. Anyone beating themselves for having recommended Sonos to friends should think again. The friends to whom I’ve made recommendations have been of full age and sound minds. I am confident that they can make their own decisions, And live with them.
5. Sonos units are not like passive speakers or traditional amps. That’s obvious. Comparisons with speakers and amps that are 30 years old are misplaced. A better comparison would be with smartphones or computers.
6. To criticise Sonos’s business model as one designed to make money from customers seems a bit, umm, unrealistic. Saying Sonos has done this cynically to gouge its existing customers, well, that’s a more fertile area for debate. 
7. My main concerns going forwards are simple and pragmatic.
   1. First, will my legacy units continue to stream? Nothing I have seen or read suggests that they are going to go silent any time soon. Perhaps one day, but not soon.
   2. Secondly, if I maintain my mixed system as a single legacy system and forego updates to the modern units, will I miss out on anything useful? Frankly, I doubt that I will.
   3. Thirdly, if I instead decide to split my system into two (legacy and modern), will I be able to stream a single Spotify account to both systems at the same time? At the moment Ryan doesn’t know. Fair enough; it’s early days. But this a genuinely important issue, as our kids like to listen to stuff that isn’t what we would necessarily wish to listen to.
   4. Fourth, if I end up splitting my system, where will the dividing line be? In other words, which parts of the house will I want to have on one system and which parts will I want on other? This will in turn factor into which units to replace, and would provide a reason to replace units earlier than otherwise anticipated.
8. I happen to think that a 30% trade in discount in these circumstances isn’t enough. The 30% trade in offer was in place a few months. Then it was an option. But if customers now feel like they are being forced to upgrade, rather than exercising an option to upgrade, then personally I think the discount should be higher than 30%. However, and it is important not to lose sight of this, there is no obligation on Sonos to offer any discount. I’ve bought iphones in the past and have had them effectively rendered EOL by iOS updates. I’ve bought computers and have had them effectively rendered EOL by increasing software demands. I don’t recall on either occasion Apple or Dell offering me a discount on my next purchase.

You need a product with a 3.5mm line in, that won’t change.

What a disappointment ! I was proud to show off my Sonos system, now I feel embarrassed I have it. With their announcement yesterday the Sonos image has gone from a company that innovates and has class to a company that  can’t plan in the tech space and shafts their most loyal customers. 

Like many others I am ready to SCREAM at the “upgrade” offer from Sonos for my two Play5 Gen1 speakers. It means two Play 5 Gen2 will cost me AUD2315 (The initial AUD1315 for the Gen1 Play 5’s, that  Sonos will “brick”, plus the AUD1000 update cost). This will make them extremely expensive speakers.

I wrote to Sonos CEO Patrick Spene on patrick.spence@sonos.com (the email is on the Sonos site) - no response yet nor do I expect it.

Below is my email:

Dear Patrick,

Please register my extreme annoyance at the email I received today to notify me of the Sonos approach to several of your products including (relevant to me) the Play 5 Gen 1 of which I have two.

My  annoyance is for the following reasons:

1) I am being held to ransom by Sonos – basically if I don’t pay Sonos AUD1000 for 2 x Play 5 Gen2 THEN  Sonos will stop all updates to the other five “Modern” speakers in my system and (quote) “Over time, this is likely to disrupt access to services and overall functionality”

The Sonos “Update” option will mean my two Play 5 Gen2 have cost me AUD2315 (The initial AUD1315 for the Gen1 Play 5’s, that  Sonos will “brick”, plus the AUD1000 update cost). This will make them extremely expensive speakers.

2) You have only given me 4 months’ notice of this. Such a short notice sets a new low standard for notifications for ceasing software update support. If the short notification does not have a sinister motive then it is reflecting some extremely short planning horizons in Sonos.

3) Conscious of the current world concerns for a Climate Change Crisis I have been making extra efforts to minimise my carbon footprint. You are forcing me to scrap two perfectly functioning speakers adding to the crisis. 

I know innovation has been a strong point for Sonos and I understand the need for change and also that 5 years is a long time in the technology scene.

My annoyance is in the way Sonos is doing it.

Two suggestions that would make the pain more palatable are:

1) Provide a motherboard upgrade at lower cost and retain the remainder of the robust and elegant Play 5 Gen1.  What is needed ? Some more memory, a new processor? Surely this will cost less than the $1,000  and be less wasteful than the notified approach.

2) The 30% trade-in is too low. To begin with it is not really 30% since I can buy a Play 5 Gen2 for $645 which is already $104 or 13.9% less than you list price. So really you are offering 22.5% credit on the $645 going price. I think for two I could do a better price.

So increase your credit for updating and start at 50% and up of you list price of $749

I believe that how you handle this will be a determinant in the future of Sonos.

Regards,

JG

My current system: 2 x Play5 Gen1, 2 x Play 3, 2 x Sonos One, and 1 x Boost (recently updated from Bridge at a cost of $104) – Total investment  AUD3050

Congratulations Sonos, you've turned many of your most loyal customers into your fiercest critics. 

This announcement is not the first and we're starting to see a terrible trend from this company. I also dont own any legacy products but I'm going to tell people to avoid this shit at all costs. 

Now you've really shot yourself in the foot, your hardware is limited by your software growth and you're having to segment your product eco-system. Your software releases have always been poor quality, either delayed because it isn't functional or rushed and buggy because you're trying to compete with bigger brands. Your hardware was amazing until now. 

Integrity is a word that does not seem to extend to Sonos. Many of us have purchased Sonos components for the express purpose of  inter-connectivity and whole house music. Many of us have accepted that older components do not have all the features of newer ones, but none of us have ever thought that Sonos would do the unspeakable and make our expensive items totally redundant.  I can understand you need and wish to keep improving your products, but why do you force all the things you think of on us.  I certainly do not want voice control, and I hardly ever use streaming. Improvement is a subjective word, and different from development.

You have had a product called Bridge, now to be moved to the legacy status.  Why not be clever and introduce a Bridge 2 - which would act as a bridge between legacy and non legacy products., it could act as a mini ‘server’ within each person’s network of Sonos items and thus reduce the processing requirements of individual components. You have the ability to include as much memory and processing power as is required to undertake such a task. It would give you greater flexibility for future developments as you would not be hampered by the weakest link.

My Connect has been deemed legacy, but I cannot see a component that replaces it. Your Port product is totally different;.it has no controls, no built in power supply, and it is a totally different size, shape and colour. Together with my redundant Bridge you are asking me to pay another £400 or so to change to a worse position.  That sounds to me like extortion and certainly would not fit my idea of a company behaving with integrity.

Please immediately postpone your May deadline and take the time to reflect upon you proposed actions.  Do you really wish to go down a path which causes so much anger and frustration for your customers.  I am sure there are alternatives which you could implement, but they will require thought and reflection.  Perhaps you will then choose to act with respect to us as Sonos purchaser and show the degree of integrity expected bu us.  

It’s all been said above, but same here….thousands of $ spent, Sonos brand advocate until now. All changed in a moment. The only slight consolation is I was about to add another Connect:amp, which I’ll now avoid.

There have been a number of contributors who have made points about Sonos now only caring about future sales and that this decision is therefore a not unexpected result. With all due respect, this is wrong. Sales of Sonos products have largely, if this thread and my own experience are any guide, by sequential purchasing and recommendation. In my case, we were bought a Play:1 some years ago as a gift, on the basis that my son had found his own to be a very good solution. I have expanded to a Play:3, a Bridge (since sold), a Connect (recently upgraded to a Port, with the old unit going on eBay), a Beam and 2 x Ones (replacing 2 x further Play:1s, with costs largely recouped) over the course of time. My son has also expanded his system

This was driven for both of us by the promised longevity and integration of Sonos. 

Oops. This clearly commercially driven decision now puts not only any future expansion in doubt, but threatens the healthy 2nd-hand market. I know Sonos might not care about that, but they should, as it represents a way for the (formerly) good name of their brand to spread.

I have seen no signs that they will reverse or reconsider this policy in the immediate future; perhaps once the share price slides further (it dropped 2.3% yesterday), someone towards the top of the management structure might recognise the PR disaster and loss of consumer trust now in progress. 

But the damage has already been done. Like many others, my investment in Sonos has come to an end, nor will I be enthusing about its products to others. 

This is a terrible terrible move, both from a PR perspective and a customer loyalty perspective.

900+ comments on this thread and 1800+ on the initial thread all appear to agree. 

One of the USPs of Sonos is that the whole system works together. Suggesting that being able to run two separate systems for ‘current’ and ‘legacy’ products really doesn’t cut it. Sure I can understand that the computing power of older units might not cut it to support newer features, but it should be possible to allow older and newer products to co-exist. 

And actually, what new features? I’ve been using Sonos for 10 years and apart from supporting lots of new music services, I can’t think of any significant feature updates. 

None of this hasn't been said before. Just adding my voice in the hope that Sonos might listen or care. So far there’s not much evidence of that.